UDHAM SINGH vs STATE OF HARYANA — CRM-M/19543/2026

Disposed: --DISMISSED on 11th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: PHHC010583822026

Filing Number

CRM-M/26092/2026

Filing Date

06-Apr-2026

Registration No

CRM-M/19543/2026

Registration Date

08-Apr-2026

Judge

Mrs. Justice Manisha Batra

Coram

Mrs. Justice Manisha Batra

Bench Type

Single

Category

99 ( 945 )

Sub-Category

40.2 - REGULAR BAIL (HARYANA) ( 219 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL BRANCH

Decision Date

11-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--DISMISSED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.UDHAM SINGH

    Adv. BALRAJ GUJJAR

  2. 2.STATE OF HARYANA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF HARYANA

  2. 2.STATE OF HARYANA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 11-May-2026

    Mrs. Justice Manisha BatraView PDF

    Case Summary: CRM-M No.19543/2026 The High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed Udham Singh's second bail petition in a murder case registered in December 2022. The petitioner was accused of conspiring with co-accused to murder a landowner over a disputed property sale; FSL reports confirmed a bullet from the victim matched a firearm recovered at his instance. While three material witnesses did not implicate him, the court found grave allegations with prima facie evidence of complicity and noted no substantial change in circumstances warranting bail, distinguishing his case from co-accused Baljeet who received bail on different grounds. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 06-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRM-M/19543/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CRM-M No.19543/2026 The High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed Udham Singh's second bail petition in a murder case registered in December 2022. The petitioner was accused of conspiring with co-accused to murder a landowner over a disputed property sale; FSL reports confirmed a bullet from the victim matched a firearm recovered at his instance. While three material witnesses did not implicate him, the court found grave allegations with prima facie evidence of complicity and noted no substantial change in circumstances warranting bail, distinguishing his case from co-accused Baljeet who received bail on different grounds. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case